THE 1994 CAMPAIGN: MASSACHUSETTS

THE 1994 CAMPAIGN: MASSACHUSETTS; Kennedy and Romney Meet, And the Rancor Flows Freely

By R. W. APPLE Jr.,

Published: October 26, 1994

BOSTON, Oct. 25—
In a vivid piece of political theater, Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts attacked his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, tonight for his views on abortion, health care and Social Security.

"I am pro-choice," Mr. Kennedy said during an exchange on abortion. "My opponent is multiple choice."

Mr. Romney, calm under fire, gave as good as he got during most of a 60-minute debate, but he failed to dent the composure of Mr. Kennedy, who came into the confrontation buoyed by a new poll showing him with a substantial lead. The challenger scored with jabs at the Senator's use of religion in the campaign and with depictions of Mr. Kennedy as the spokesman for an outdated brand of liberalism.

"I am tough on crime," Mr. Romney said. "He is not."

But Mr. Kennedy managed to make his opponent look inexperienced in the intricacies of Federal finance and the way legislation is enacted. He forced Mr. Romney to admit he did not know how much his ideas on health care would cost. And perhaps most important for the Senator, he demonstrated that he was not a has-been, although Mr. Romney took every opportunity to argue that it was time for a change after the incumbent's more than three decades on Capitol Hill.

Several of the Republican and Democratic politicians who critiqued the debate for local news outlets called it a draw in which no knockdowns, let alone knockouts, were scored by either candidate. If television viewers agree, that would tend to favor Senator Kennedy because he has no ground to make up.

In one protracted wrangle, involving accusations by Mr. Romney about the Senator's personal finances, Mr. Kennedy said stonily: "Mr. Romney, the Kennedys are not in public service to make money. We have paid too high a price."

The debate, telecast statewide, was staged in Faneuil Hall, a red-brick structure dating from pre-Revolutionary times, whose cupola is crowned by a gilded metal grasshopper. It was the highlight so far of the midterm election campaign -- far more robust, in keeping with Boston's liking for politics as spectator sport, than the tepid exchanges that have taken place in many states.

Much of the first half centered on jobs, a central issue in Massachusetts, and things quickly degenerated into a shouting match that the moderator, Ken Bode, had some trouble controlling. Mr. Romney said he knew how to create jobs because of his "skill and experience in the private sector," while Mr. Kennedy argued that his seniority in the Senate better qualified him to provide the training and education needed to guarantee well-paying employment in the state.

Then the Senator accused Mr. Romney of denying medical care to part-time workers he employs. Mr. Romney called that hypocrisy and said the Kennedy family did the same thing at its Merchandise Mart in Chicago, and the shouting began.

Afterward, the Kennedy forces distributed a news release, prepared in anticipation of Mr. Romney's accusations, saying that the mart's 400 full-time employees were given medical coverage and that its seven part-time workers were all covered to some degree. The rebuttal, of course, had none of the drama of Mr. Romney's heated words in the debate, which appeared to be extemporaneous.

Mr. Kennedy, who is 62 years old, allowed Mr. Romney to seize the initiative during the summer and found himself in a dead heat by Labor Day. Mr. Romney, trim and darkly handsome at 47, was transformed from a little-known venture capitalist (albeit one with a famous name) into a David who might slay Goliath.

The last of three political brothers, Senator Kennedy is one of the Democrats whom the Republicans would most like to defeat on Nov. 8, along with Gov. Mario M. Cuomo of New York and House Speaker Thomas S. Foley of Washington.

Mr. Romney accused Mr. Kennedy of misrepresenting and distorting his record, demanding, "When will this end?" In turn, Mr. Kennedy said he would provide documentation of his assertions and called upon Mr. Romney to talk instead about his views on the economy and "the pain of the people in Massachusetts."

"Give me a break, Mr. Romney, give me a break," the Senator said angrily after his rival accused him of being soft on crime for opposing some mandatory sentence guidelines and noted his longtime opposition to the death penalty.

Despite the spirited exchanges and fleeting looks of anger, the two men shook hands afterward and exchanged a few pleasantries.

Both Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Romney prepared carefully. In the customary dry runs, Charles Baker, the Human Services Secretary in the Cabinet of Gov. William F. Weld of Massachusetts, played Mr. Kennedy for the benefit of Mr. Romney. For Mr. Kennedy's rehearsal, David Smith, a former Kennedy aide, took the part of Mr. Romney.

Several hours before the debate began, supporters gathered on the plaza between Faneuil Hall and Quincy Market, a popular tourist attraction in downtown Boston. The Kennedy backers carried blue placards, the Romney partisans red-and-blue ones.

A poll carried out over the weekend by The Boston Herald showed Senator Kennedy widening his lead, largely because of defections from Mr. Romney by independents. They hold the key to any Republican's chances in predominantly Democratic Massachusetts. In The Herald survey, which had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus five percentage points and was based on interviews with 447 likely voters, Mr. Kennedy led 50 percent to 32 percent, with 18 percent undecided.

Mr. Romney needed a strong showing tonight and another in a second debate scheduled for Thursday night in Holyoke to stage a comeback. So he probably had the most at stake.

For Mr. Romney, a son of George W. Romney, the former Governor of Michigan whose ill-advised comment about having been brainwashed in Vietnam prematurely ended his bid for the Presidency in 1968, the debates also offered a chance to demonstrate that he could deal effectively with issues of substance.

A political neophyte, Mr. Romney had scored earlier in the campaign mainly by attacking Senator Kennedy and arguing that it was time for a change. Like many other challengers in this year of anti-incumbent fervor, Mr. Romney had spent little time defining a program of his own.

One of his most biting commercials, which ran last week, accused Mr. Kennedy of making big profits on a real estate deal in Washington "at taxpayers' expense." The Senator, who denied the accusations, had himself run a slashing series of advertisements accusing Mr. Romney of making big profits on a deal that cost hundreds of workers' jobs in Indiana. Mr. Romney had issued a denial in that case.

For Mr. Kennedy, first elected in 1962, the debate offered a chance to show that three decades in the Senate had not dulled his zest for political battle or public service, and to rebut his opponent's contention that years of hard living had enfeebled him.

In political circles in Washington, Mr. Kennedy is considered a legislative craftsman of great skill. He has long been viewed as the Senate's leading advocate of liberal causes, and he is admired for his hard work, even by adversaries like Senator Alan K. Simpson, a conservative Republican from Wyoming.

But in Massachusetts, his standing has been eroded by such episodes as the drowning of Mary Jo Kopechne in the Senator's car on Chappaquiddick Island in July 1969 and the trial of his nephew William Kennedy Smith on rape charges after he and Senator Kennedy had gone bar-hopping in Palm Beach, Fla., on Good Friday, 1991.

For many years his considerable influence in the halls of Congress -- his ability to deliver jobs for his constituents -- has to some degree obscured his personal troubles, including his divorce from his first wife, Joan.

But in late middle age he has proved vulnerable, and Mr. Romney has proved a vigorous challenger, even in South Boston, where rancor over the court-ordered school busing that began in 1974 remains a force, and where Mr. Romney has found a ready audience for his argument that "the 1960's liberal agenda has not worked."